To ask what high earners do all day?

Yes, public sector, government funding, outside the UK. You may have missed the last bit.

I earn the sum quoted in the OP. I am not exploiting the taxpayer, I work hard during my legally allotted hours. I do not let work bleed into my private time. Chances are that by leading a relatively healthy, stress-free life and protecting my wellbeing and mental health I am saving the taxpayer money in the long run, as stress-related diseases are a massive burden on the economy.

So have a strategic plan for the next project. Talk to the people who will execute it. Oversee it. Have meetings with outside partners (could be clients, could be people who have to approve said project).
I would say a division between meetings, "deep work", reading/planning/thinking/writing, a small chunk of boring admin (the higher you go, the more you have people for this).

You would also not have one project on the go but 7 or 8 at the same time so all the work for that project multiplied by X number. There are endless decisions to make and a lot of pressure because if things fail your head might be on the line.

There is also plenty of travel- this month alone to Europe and North America. In January to Europe. February to Australia. March to Europe and Asia. April to North America. It's a global role so comes with global travel. That also then means having at one's fingertips all this country specific information.

Sure, public sector, government funding. You are either not being paid Big Bucks (except in your eyes) or you are exploiting the taxpayer.

Sounds like a cushy number.

Whilst I do mix in these circles - a few partners in law and accounting firms, senior medical consultants, management consultants. No one talks about their jobs, it would almost be more polite to talk about money!!!! It's not a topic for company.

Unfortunately, they rarely mention that in the advert it only becomes apparent years later like a boiled frog. You’re too far in by then.

That's a fairly meaningless question TBH. The activities that someone performs depend on what sector they're in and how far up the ladder they need to be in that sector to be earning that money. There are a some senior doctors earning that much in the NHS, there are mid-level analysts earning that in the City, and there are business owners in all sorts of businesses across the UK earning that, and they're all doing different things.

In view of the number of decision-related questions asked every day on MN, it seems fairly obvious that people in general can be hesitant about making decisions and choices for fear of getting it wrong.

I make a fair bit more than your benchmark. I work long hours but don't fool myself that I work harder than many people on more average wages. I get so much largely because of the impact of my work: basically I help my clients to make a lot more money in their businesses. I'm paid on that basis. If I was less competent/strategic/lucky I'd earn less. The work itself is largely about decision making, and guiding others to make those decisions that matter to their business strategy (strategy is essentially just decision making).

If you earn big bucks in the public sector and you're relatively chilled and relaxed, maybe the taxpayer is losing out.

You seem to be proving many posters’ point. You (and most people) would not be willing nor could do these jobs, which is why they have to be so well remunerated.

They’re not worth it to you, but they ARE worth it to some people. We’re all different, including how much we are money motivated. Some people think “I’ll just myself through 5-10 years at the top then I can make enough money to retire early” while others prioritise health and work life balance in the present and don’t mind working more years. Where I work it’s common for people to retire around 50. You could say that cutting your working years by 15 or so years and amassing enough wealth to afford the best healthcare is taking care of yourself. Just as choosing to work 35 hours a week instead of 60 hours but over a longer period of time is. There’s no one right way to do life.

no neither would I and my late husband didn't either.

I wouldn't apply for a job that required me to ruin my health.

That's possibly why you wouldn't do well in the jobs we are talking about. I am not being insulting, I couldn't do it either.

Managing people, projects.

At exec level you get paid the big bucks for assuming risk, not for working long hours. You're accountable for a huge budget or of health and safety for lots of people or for legal compliance etc.

I[d define healthy as being able to take time off when sick and being able to relax outside working hours and on holiday. People fought and died for reasonable limits to the working week. It is also better for businesses not to have highly pressured people as single points of failure.

I don't think its one model though. What works for one person will not work or be healthy for another.

the statement upthread about the worst stress being felt by people who feel powerless is a very important point. I think a lot of the high earners are people who can see how things can be done better and feel driven to achieve those improvements....actually this can apply to the less high earners too. For the last few years before I retired from the NHS, my job changed a lot because I was one of those people who could see how services could be improved and was willing to put myself out there to do it. It was rolling a huge rock and in the grand scheme of things, I didn't get far but its satisfying to see what has been built on the foundations I started to lay.
I don't disagree that the culture of hustle and grind exists but its not the whole story.

Who defines healthy though? I like working. I enjoy my work.

Women should model not being reliant on anyone, including the state, IMO. If they can.

Those are not the only 2 options. Women who earn well should model healthy life work balance for their juniors IMO.

I agree. But for those of us that are self employed it's a necessity.

If you are lucky enough to do something you enjoy it can feel less intense and not toxic. Take today for me, I started at 7am. Had a short coffee break at about 9.30am then worked to though to 8pm. It did not feel like a grind - I was completely absorbed in the task - refining a digital strategy and writing a paper seeking approval for an emergency change of the strategy. The rest of the day was spent on Governance - appointment of new board members and policy writing in preparation for an external audit. I enjoy the work and am good at so I feel happy.

Beats posting on here that your husband has left you for a 22 year old leaving you with nothing. Beats being on benefits because your wage is too low.

Worth it for me. We need more women earning well.

The hustle and grind culture is so toxic. Who does it serve to have your brightest employees permanently exhausted and on the verge of burnout?

Ds is a grad and his company spout all sorts of crap about work life balance, gyms, health - they might even have a daft pool table in the foyer (that should have been alarm bells). The reality is he's working and studying every spare minute he gets - not convinced he'll last beyond a year - because the pressure and workload is insane. We are trying to support him as much as possible but if I was being honest - I think it's too much and he should leave but that's his decision.

My company has an entire Wellness team, masses of collateral and marketing about perks of the job etc. We have a free onsite gym, PTs, nurse, physio etc. So on paper are doing a fantastic job in providing wellness to its employees.

But the workload is mental for those a few rungs up the ladder. So whilst its lovely to have a free onsite gym and PT I genuinely haven't used it for 18 months as I don't even have much time to grab a quick bite to eat.

I'm sure plenty of the grads, back office staff and junior staff would tell you a much more positive story than me, as they typically aren't taking the same complexity of work or in decision making roles.